Self-discrepancy theory as a transdiagnostic framework: A meta-analysis of self-discrepancy and psychopathology.

2019 ◽  
Vol 145 (4) ◽  
pp. 372-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyler B. Mason ◽  
Kathryn E. Smith ◽  
Allison Engwall ◽  
Alisson Lass ◽  
Michael Mead ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
E. Tory Higgins ◽  
Emily Nakkawita

Self-discrepancy theory and regulatory focus theory are two related motivational theories. Self-discrepancy theory describes the associations between self and affect, positing that the relations among different sets of self-concepts influence a person’s emotional experience. A discrepancy between a person’s ideal self-guide (e.g., hopes and aspirations) and his or her actual self-concept produces dejection-related emotions (e.g., sadness), whereas a discrepancy between a person’s ought self-guide (e.g., duties and obligations) and his or her actual self-concept produces agitation-related emotions (e.g., anxiety). The intensity of these emotional experiences depends upon the magnitude and accessibility of the associated discrepancy. Regulatory focus theory builds on self-discrepancy theory, positing that distinct self-regulatory systems are reflected in the two types of self-guides proposed in self-discrepancy theory. The promotion system is motivated by ideal end-states, by pursuing hopes and aspirations; as a result, it is primarily concerned with the presence or absence of positive outcomes—with gains and non-gains. Given this focus on gains and non-gains, the promotion system is motivated by fundamental needs for nurturance and growth. In contrast, the prevention system is motivated by ought end-states, by fulfilling duties and obligations; as a result, it is primarily concerned with the presence or absence of negative outcomes—with losses and non-losses. Given this focus on losses and non-losses, the prevention system is motivated by fundamental needs for safety and security. The promotion and prevention systems predict a range of important variables relating to cognition, performance, and decision-making.


This chapter aims to: demonstrate the role of individual differences; identify how issues of the self, such as self-efficacy and self-esteem, can influence women’s career choice and career outcomes; discuss self-discrepancy theory in relation to gender role conflict in the workplace; evaluate if high self-esteem and self-efficacy can be advantageous to women working in male dominated occupations and industries; describe how internalised self-view, may contribute to gendered occupational segregation; and discuss the concept of the psychological contract and job satisfaction.


2012 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 131-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam A Augustine ◽  
Randy J. Larsen

Although several definitions exist, a personality trait can be defined as the average or expected value of personality-relevant behaviors. However, recent evidence suggests that, while trait questionnaires and aggregated momentary assessments of personality are highly related, they may also differ in meaningful ways. In this study, we examine the relationship between trait and mean state personality. Results indicate that these two assessment strategies, although highly related, do not show convergence (r = .39–.64) levels that would signify an equity of constructs. In line with this, these two assessment strategies show differential predictive utility. Although the pattern of this differential predictive utility suggests that measurement error may account for differences, the difference between trait and mean state personality predicts affect in a manner consistent with self-discrepancy theory. Thus, although these two constructs are highly related, the differences between trait and mean state personality are meaningful.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document